User listed in sysop and Bureaucrats table receives Permission error
Permission error You do not have permission to <action-confirmaccount>, for the following reason: The action you have requested is limited to users in the group: Bureaucrats.
Permission error You do not have permission to create this user account, for the following reason: The action you have requested is limited to users in the group: Administrators.
After 1.18.1 to 1.23.5 upgrade.
I have the SUL for Runab (home plwiki) but still have conflicts on mediawiki.org. There's one problem. On mediwiki.org account Runab (not my) has a six edition (last: 13.01.2013 ). Is it change on create new account for Runab from mediawiki.org, so I could end create my SUL account? Runab
Hi. I'm going to try downgrading the protection level of the main page (MediaWiki). It's been set to [edit=sysop:move=sysop] [cascading] since January 2007. This sucks for a few reasons:
- it's anti-wiki;
- cascading protection gets in the way of updating sub-templates; and
- it's still sufficiently difficult to obtain autoconfirmed and figure out how to edit that the software restrictions arguably add little actual protection.
So we're gonna try it out for a bit and see what happens. If there's a lot of vandalism, we can always re-protect or investigate other options like FlaggedRevs.
Last edit: 14:23, 4 February 2013
If the experiment goes well a next candidate could be Template:MediaWiki News.
+1 as well. I had already proposed something similar in Thread:Project:Current issues/Replace full protection with FlaggedRevs, but it seems the lack of FlaggedRevs in the Main and Project namespaces prevent a more permissive approach. Is there a reason for that configuration?
In any case, since the main page is semi-protected and could potentially be vandalized, I don't see a reason for Template:Main page not to be as well. Ideally, FlaggedRevs could allow an extra level of scrutiny, not so much with vandalism prevention in mind, but to provide a system for changes in the landing page not to go public without peer review.
Unfortunately, we've been getting more test/spam edits to it recently, and I'm considering reinstating the full protection.
But if the main page is semiprotected, why is template:Main page (i.e. the actual content of the main page) fully-protected?
I use special extension that protects just page and that's it )
I always using external image to paste the picture in the mediawiki. If I use internal phrase of mediawiki, the direct links with the png ot jpg external file name will auto show the picture in the mediawiki. But I want to
1. resize the picture and add the frame line around the picture so I want just using html phrase and don't want using wiki's phrase. I find the rawhtml function and it seems can provide full html support, but even if I add the command - "$wgRawHtml = true" in the localsetting file ,it(rawhtml) seems not work (still show the picture automatically). If I want to enable some phrase with html code and remove all the mediawiki support temporarily, how could I do?
2. just want the picture link using the type of hyperlink like the result of vbb code [url=XXXXXX.png]hyperlink name[/url] Because the picture will auto showing after I paste the direct link with png external file name , I can't use this method to show the hyperlink like below example - [http://XXXXXXXX.png hyperlike name]
3.Then,if I use the nowiki tag, it seems not only stop support mediawiki phrase, but also I can't use the html phrase, is this true?
thanks anyone answer my questions
Can anybody think of a reason why HTTPS links would not be rendered as links? All instances of HTTPS links across my entire wiki (including pages in the Special namespace [i.e. Special:Version]) are rendered as if surrounded by <nowiki> tags.
HTTP renders properly FTP renders properly [https://test HTTPS renders exactly like this]
Damn you whoever thought enforcing HTTPS was a really wonderful move. At least do it properly. Here on mediawiki.org I can't disable HTTPS. The related checkbox is always checked even tho the preferences page says "You preferences are saved". Ironically Bugzilla is all on HTTPS so I can't report it over here. F**k.
Delete the cookies that say ForceHTTPS in your browser. However you shouldn't be logged into any wiki that has SSL enabled. Cussing won't help either, by the way.
should be lower case forceHTTPS, sorry.
But in any case, I've had that problem before too. You have to relogin and when logging in, not from HTTPS.
Last edit: 20:12, 6 August 2014
I need to change the maximum upload file size but its not working with me the upload window shows this
Maximum file size: 2 MB (a file on your computer) Permitted file types: png, gif, jpg, jpeg, doc, xls, mpp, pdf, ppt, xlsx, jpg, tiff, odt, odg, ods, odp.
so i need to make the maximum file upload 150MB i edited the following according to the Manuals in the website Manual:Configuring_file_uploads
#MaxUploadFiles $wgUploadSizeWarning = 157286400; $wgMaxUploadSize = 157286400;
from the \xampp\htdocs\mediawiki\LocalSettings.php file
upload_max_filesize = 150M post_max_size = 150M
from the \xampp\php\php.ini-development file and also in the C:\xampp\php\php.ini-production file i know i am supposed to edit php.ini but these are the php.ini files that i found in the php folder so im not sure if i am editing the right files?
even after making these changes i still get this error Warning: POST Content-Length of 18143113 bytes exceeds the limit of 8388608 bytes in Unknown on line 0
so how can i change the file limit for the upload?
im sorry if i was not clear enough in my question but anyway!
i found the solution for whoever has the same problem. so in Xampp the php.ini file is located in xampp/php/php the file is called php without the ini but its the right one. so i opened that up and changed these
upload_max_filesize = 150M post_max_size = 150M
like i mentioned before, so my problem was that i forgot to restart apache in my virtual server! so if you are using xampp go to the xampp control panel and just hit stop then start again and it should work just fine!
hope it helps :)
First, I would like to say that the comparison page showing all the applications that use Open Street Maps is "amazing".
Second, I would to apologize for duplicating this post; I'm not what key I accidentally hit for that.
There is one column that I think would be a very good addition, although I don't know how difficult it would be to get this information. You would probably have to ask each developer if their app supported it.
Since many users devices, especially phones, have a limited amount of internal storage, they are looking for a way to store at least the map data, and possibly the app itself on an external SD card. If a column were added to the charts that indicate this capability, it would be very helpful.
You only need to go to the CoPilot forms to see how this has become a hot topic over there. An otherwise excellent product is being abandoned by many users because of their refusal to fix their product to allow this. Their forums contain many references to MapFactor Navigator, which does support this (like many apps) but they just blame everything on Google/Android, and have refused to do anything in over two years.
It looks like you're complaining about osmwiki:List of OSM based Services. While the OpenStreetMap wiki runs on MediaWiki, this site is not responsible for the content hosted there. Please direct all feedback at the proper discussion page.
Hello guys i am looking for wikipedia api of geocode based.
Requirement is when i pass latitude and longitude of that API its Return data from Wikipedia .after i want to place that data into google map.
Please help me if any buddy know this kind of API. Looked this
Problem with formating when trasfering text/html formated site to Mediawiki formated site.
I have two wiki sites and woud like to transfer articles from old one to new. Then appears problem with formatink.
Old page content type: content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"
New page content type: content="MediaWiki 1.19.5-1"
And this is code of my article:
quoted black word grey word grey word grey word black word grey word
On old site article looks: http://s23.postimg.org/t10ogt3pn/wiki1.png
And on new: http://s23.postimg.org/t10ogt3pn/wiki1.png
So, my questioon: It's there a easy options for quoting and shadowing words?
I am trying to upload a current picture and Wikipedia says I don't have the authority to do that. How do I get the authority?